Freda's Case

Nurses play a central role in advocating for their patients. In the case of Freda, the moral conflict between the nurse and physician revolves around the implementation of a feeding tube, in which the nurses feel does not respect Freda’s wishes. In utilitarianism, the beneficence principle means the value of the good (Collier & Haliburton, 2015, p. 440). In Freda’s case she defines good as dying peacefully. In Kantianism, the principle of autonomy states that the competent individual has the right to be self-determining (Collier & Haliburton, 2015, p. 440). So we can say, Freda’s right to refuse treatment is suitable as long as it is within the extent of what she values. The physician’s action to place a feeding tube attempts to promote Freda’s …show more content…
By acting on utilitarianism, one must be knowledgeable of all possible consequences related to the act, and other actions that can occur from another action (Collier & Haliburton, 2015, p. 12). In Freda’s case the physician does not account all the consequences of implementing a feeding tube. These consequences must reflect the burdens and benefits that associate with using a feeding tube. The feeding tube only supplements Freda’s nutritional needs. The actual procedure to insert a feeding tube will cause harm and pain. Not only does it delay Freda’s death, but also adds psychological pain for the mother, who may suffer from caregiver burden trying to maintain the feeding tube and take responsibility of Freda’s care as she becomes functionally dependent. According to Mill, the most pleasurable desires associates with higher faculties such as higher cognition, and less on bodily needs (Collier & Haliburton, 2015, p. 9). In this case, the physician only satisfies the lower level pleasures, but does not optimize her intellectual capacity. According to Jeremy Bentham, when considering what action to perform, it requires us to add all the pleasures and pain (Collier & Haliburton, 2015, p. 7). In Freda’s case, the amount of pain may outweigh the actual benefits of the feeding tube. In utilitarianism, the ideal action reflects on promoting the greatest amount of good for the greatest amount of people. The physician’s decision to have a feeding tube suppresses the nurses and Freda’s happiness, thus does not reasonably justify his action. The physician action affects the happiness of the nursing staff and Freda because he only takes into account his happiness and the mothers. In addition, providing a feeding tube offers an instrumental value, as a means to promote the pleasures of eliminating pain associated with hunger. In the case of Freda, this instrumental value of food would not promote happiness,